Classical Armenian Online

Lesson 5

Todd B. Krause, John A.C. Greppin, and Jonathan Slocum

Arshak II and the Partitioning of Armenia

Under Constantine, rumblings of division within the Roman empire shifted
attention away from the eastern provinces. This left Armenia with little
hope of assistance against the onslaughts of the new Sasanid king, Shapur
II (309 - 379 A.D.). It was amidst his attacks on Armenia and Syria, and
in response to the Zoroastrian proselytizing, that Trdat the Great had
chosen to make Armenia a Christian state.

Just who ruled Armenia after Trdat the Great remains veiled in obscurity.
The next ruler to emerge, about whom some certain information is known, was
Arshak II. It is not clear, however, if his reign began in 338 or 350 A.D.
Under his rule, Armenia entered a period of restructuring, which began with
the Church. A descendant of Gregory, Nerses I, became the catholicos and
forbade the practice of any non-Christian religions. Permitting married
men to join the clergy, he established church hierarchy wherein
non-celibate clergy were subordinate to the celibate clerics. Arshak,
however, was a proponent of the Arian doctrine, and when Nerses would not
fall in line with this view, Arshak had him replaced. Such leniency was
not granted to other nobles, whom Arshak had killed if they voiced any
opposition.

Arshak's position of relative security faltered when Shapur II defeated the
emperor Julian and forced his successor Jovian to cede Armenia to Persia in
364 A.D. Arshak and his general Vasak Mamikonian were taken to Persia and
blinded, and Arshak's wife was likewise killed. Only his son Pap escaped
to Pontus. Armenia was thus subject to Persian domination, and
Zoroastrianism was imposed as the state religion.

Rome finally took initiative in 367 A.D., supplying troops to Arshak's son
Pap and an Armenian general Mushegh Mamikonian, who managed to re-take
Armenia from the Persians. Pap invited Nerses to return as catholicos; but
Pap's pro-Arian views, in line with those of the emperor Valens, led to
dissent within the Church. Nerses was eventually killed and Mushegh
Mamikonian, together with several nobles, turned against Pap. The nobles
split the region of Dsopk into five districts, independent and under the
protection of Rome. Pap was murdered in 374 A.D., and the nephew who
succeeded him was soon replaced by a Mamikonian. The death of Shapur in
379 A.D. and the partition of the Roman empire into the Western and Eastern
empires changed the political climate, and the Mamikonians eventually
restored Pap's two sons to the throne, marrying them to Mamikonian women.

Pap's younger son, Arshak III, was forced to flee to the western regions in
385 A.D., and the Arshakuni prince Khosrov IV was elevated to king by the
pro-Persian nobles. In 387 A.D., the emperor Theodosius and Shapur III
decided to partition Armenia, and Arshak III was given reign over the
Byzantine-controlled western region. Khosrov IV continued to rule over
Greater Armenia subject to Sasanid domination. When Arshak died, no new
Armenian king was appointed, and the Arshakuni line came to an end in
Byzantine Armenia. In the east, Khosrov was followed by Vramshapuh (389 -
417 A.D.). Under Vramshapuh, Sahak was named catholicos, the last one of the
line of Gregory the Illuminator.

The Armenian Alphabet

The partition of Armenia into west and east divisions subject to the
dominion of different empires was a force threatening to dissolve the sense
of a national Armenian identity. A similar problem plagued the Armenian
Church: in much of Armenia the Syrian liturgy was used and threatened the
authority of the Armenian Church; Byzantium was rapidly becoming the
dominant regional power in church matters; paganism and Zoroastrianism
still had a foothold in Armenian territory. This was the situation which
faced Vramshapuh and the catholicos Sahak. Their solution was to codify
the identity of the Armenian people through their language. For this an
alphabet was needed, one distinct from those of the neighboring regions.
This was the task which they charged to Mesrop Mashtots, a cleric born in
the province of Taron, and who had studied Greek and Syriac.

Sometime between 400 and 407 A.D., having studied other alphabets and having
consulted different calligraphers, Mesrop created the Armenian alphabet.
The Sasanid rulers of the time were tolerant, and Mesrop's students were
able to open schools for teaching the alphabet. The Byzantine emperor
Theodosius II allowed them to do the same in Byzantine Armenia. The
Armenians then entered into a period of translating works from other
languages, beginning with the Bible and other liturgical material.
Translations of classical works of philosophy, rhetoric, and grammar soon
followed, with manuscripts of Aristotle's works becoming particularly
prevalent. Voluminous translation continued from the fifth to seventh
centuries, when Arab invasion curbed their efforts. Original works began
to be composed after the end of the Arshakuni line, signalled by the death
of Vramshapuh's son Artashes IV in 428 A.D.

Reading and Textual Analysis

Yeznik Kolbatsi, that is, Yeznik of Kolb, was probably born in A.D. 400, but
the date of his death is not known. The purpose of his writing was to
maintain orthodoxy and to repel heresies and other religious systems that
opposed Christianity. His work Against the Sects is in four books:
(1) Against the Heresy of Sects; (2) Against the Religion of the Persians;
(3) Against the Religion of the Greek Philosopher; (4) Against the Marcion
Heresy. This passage is from Book 1, Chapter 12.

կերակրոց-- noun; genitive plural of <կերակուր> different dishes; food; meal --of food # if նիշ is here truly nominal, then կերակրոց is a genitive dependent on նիշ; if այս նիշ is treated together as an adjectival whole, then կերակրոց could be an ablative in a construction with ճաշակել ի + abl. 'to partake of', and այս նիշ would be an undeclined adjective preceding its noun

մահաբերէ-- adjective; ablative singular of <մահաբեր> death-bearing --deadly (part) # is the preceding ի redundant, so this just modifies տնկոյ or իմեքէ? or is this a substantive without a demonstrative suffix?

Translation

But accordingly they also ask this: "If nothing evil existed before, whence
did the serpent, which you call Satan, learn the characteristics of Evil?"
We say that Satan understood as evil man's disobedience to God, on account
of which he induced man to this. It is like when one would be another's
enemy, and having concealed his enmity, he would secretly wish to harm him;
yet he would not know the nature of the harm, and having come he would
wander around in search of means; then, having found the time when someone
among the physicians would give an order to his adversary not to touch this
thing, and not to taste such a type of food, by which he could arrive to
health; and having heard of it, soon pretending under the guise of
friendship, he would blame the healer; and, labelling the useful things as
harmful to him, he would persuade him, and he would give directions
contrary to the orders of the physician, and by this do him harm; and, if
he did not recognize beforehand the nature of the harm, rather having found
the cure in the physician's order, it was harmful. Thus it is thought also
of Satan, his envying of the first-created man, and his not knowing the
nature of the evil-doing; because, though there was no evil before, from
which it was possible to recognize its nature, nevertheless having learned
from God's commandment -- which was given to man to keep him from partaking
of some deadly part of the plant -- he offered to man that which, though it
was not a useless bit of food for man, and not by nature a deadly plant,
nevertheless on this very count man was prohibited from partaking of this
-- rather disobedience was the basis of death for man, as for a criminal
who would disobey the dictum of an authority that would restrain him.

Grammar

21. Interrogatives and Relatives

21.1. Interrogative Adjectives, Prounouns, and Adverbs

The interrogativeadjectiveո՞ր 'which?'
is declined as follows.

Sing.

Pl.

N

ո՞ր

ո՞րք, ո՞ր

Ac

ո՞ր

ո՞րս, ո՞ր

G

որո՞յ

որո՞ց

D

որու՞մ

որո՞ց

L

որու՞մ

ո՞րս, որու՞մ

Ab

որմէ՞

որո՞ց

I

որո՞վ

որո՞վք

The form ո՞ր of the singular is often used in place of the N Ac plural
forms ո՞րք and ո՞րս. Less frequently, the L singular որու՞մ replaces
the L plural ո՞րս. The interrogative adjective does not distinguish
between animate or inanimate referents. For example, ո՞ր թագաւորտայցէ պատերազմ 'which king will wage war?'; որո՞վ զաւրութեամբկամ որո՞վ անուամբ արարէք դուք զայս 'by what power or by what
name did you do this?'; յորու՞մ ժամանակի 'at what time?'

The interrogativepronoun is formed from two stems, ո- for
persons and ի- for things. The ի-forms exhibit no plural. The
declensions are as follows.

Persons

Things

ո-

ի-

N Sg.

ո՞վ, ո՞

զի՞, զի՞նչ

Ac

ո՞վ, ո՞

զի՞, զի՞նչ

G

ո՞յր

է՞ր

D

ու՞մ

ի՞մ, հի՞մ

L

ու՞մ

ի՞մ, հի՞մ

Ab

ու՞մէ, ու՞մմէ

ի՞մէ

I

որո՞վ

ի՞ւ

N Pl.

ո՞յք

-

Ac

ո՞յս

-

G

ո՞յց

-

D

ո՞յց

-

L

ո՞յս

-

Ab

ո՞յց

-

I

որո՞վք

-

The instrumental forms որո՞վ and որո՞վք are borrowed from the
interrogative adjective. The forms զի՞ and զի՞նչ display the
accusative marker զ-, which has spread analogically to the nominative.
զինչ may also be used as an interrogative adjective for things, e.g.
զի՞նչ գործ գործեալ է քո 'what deed have you done?'

The forms զի՞ and հի՞մ may mean 'why?', as well as the form զմէ
built from the ablative with զ-. ընդ and վասն may be used with the
genitive in the same role: ընդէ՞ր, վասն է՞ր 'why?'

There are several interrogativeadverbs,
referring to

place: յո՞ 'whither?', ու՞ր 'where?', ուստի՞ 'whence?';

time: ե՞րբ 'when?', which may be used as either interrogative or relative adverb, e.g. ե՞րբ լինիցի այդ 'when will that happen?', մինչեւ ցե՞րբ իցեմ ընդ ձեզ 'how long shall I be with you?', ե՞րբ գնացին 'when they had gone...';

manner: ո՞րպէս and զիա՞րդ 'how?'

21.2. Relative Pronoun

The relativepronoun has no distinct forms; rather the forms of the
interrogatives are used in this role. Understanding of their usage,
however, requires distinguishing between two types of relative clause: the
attributive relative clause and the substantive relative clause. An
attributiverelativeclause is one which serves to describe its
antecedent noun, much as an attributive adjective does. Some English
examples would be 'the person whoiswritingtheArmenianlessons has brown hair', or 'send all email enquiries to the person bywhomtheArmenianlessonswerewritten.' In both examples the
relative clauses serve an adjectival, or attributive, role modifying 'the
person'. By contrast a substantiverelativeclause is a relative
clause which, as a whole, fills the place of a noun. Again, this parallels
the substantive use of an adjective. Some English examples would be 'whostolethelastcookie is no friend of mine', which in slightly
smoother English becomes 'whoeverstolethelastcookie is no
friend of mine'; or 'do whatIsay.' In the first example, the
relative clause in its entirety functions as the subject of the verb 'is';
in the second example, the whole relative clause is the object of the verb
'do'. In either situation the relative clause could be replaced by a
single noun, e.g. 'Cicero is no friend of mine' or 'do something.'

Once the distinction is made between types of relative clause, relative
pronoun usage becomes straightforward. Namely, in

attributiverelativeclauses one uses որ as relative.

substantiverelativeclauses one uses որ, less often ով, ո, for persons, որ զինչ for things.

The forms are the same as those listed for the interrogative adjective and
pronoun, without the question mark ՞.

Examples of attributiverelativeclauses are վասն բանիցն զորփաւսեցան հովիւքն 'on account of the words which the shepherds had
said'; եւթն ղամբարք... որ են եւթն հոգիքն Աստուծոյ 'seven
torches... which are the seven spirits of God'; ընտրեաց երկոտասանս,
զորս եւ առաքեալս անուանեաց 'he chose twelve, whom he also called
Apostles'; վեց աւր է, յորս արժան է գործել 'there are six
days in which working is permitted'. Note in this last example that յորս
< ի + որս is locative.

21.3. Indefinite Pronoun

As with the interrogative pronouns, the indefinitepronouns exibit
a base ո- for persons and a base ի- for things. Two series of pronouns
are formed from these, one with an indefinitizing suffix -մն, the other
with -ք. Both series may be used in either adjectival or pronominal
roles. The declensions are as follows.

ոմն

իմն

ոք

*իք

'someone'

'something'

'someone'

'something'

N Sg.

ոմն

իմն

ոք

*իք, ինչ

Ac

ոմն

իմն

ոք

-, ինչ

G

ուրումն

-

ուրուք

իրիք

D

ումեմն

-

ումեք

իմիք

L

ումեմն

-

ումեք

իմիք

Ab

ումեմնէ

իմեմնէ

ումեքէ

իմեք(է)

I

ոմամբ

-

-

իւիք

N Pl.

ոմանք

-

-

-

Ac

ոմանս

-

-

-

G

ոմանց

-

-

-

D

ոմանց

-

-

-

L

ոմանս

-

-

-

Ab

ոմանց

-

-

-

I

ոմամբք

-

-

-

The form *իք is not found alone, but only in combination with the
negative չ- in the form չիք 'there is not, there does not exist',
e.g ցիք ձեզ կեանք 'there is no life for you', չիք ոք այլԱստուած 'there is no other God'. In place of *իք the noun ինչ, G
ըն՛ի 'thing' is used. This word is also found with a prefixed negative,
ոչինչ, G ոչընչի 'nothing', e.g. յոչըչէն արար զնոսա 'He
created them from nothing.' As adjective, ինչ remains in the singular
even with plural substantive: աւուրս ինչ (Ac Pl.) 'for some days'.

The instrumental singular form ոմամբ from ոմն fills in for the missing
instrumental singular of ոք.

The indefinite pronouns are often used to strengthen the interrogatives,
e.g. ո՞վ ոք 'who indeed?, who in the world?'; որպիսի ոք կին
'what a woman!' The ոք and *իք series of indefinites, however, are
not used in general declarative statements; they only occur in negative,
interrogative, conditional, and relative clauses, and with the pronoun
իւրաքանչիւր 'each', adverb հազիւ 'hardly' and particle թերեւս
'perhaps'. This does not hold true for the forms ինչ. For example,
էր ոմն հիւանդ 'someone was ill', but ոչ ոք է 'it is no
one'.

The indefiniteadverboftime has two forms parallel to the
pronouns: երբեմն and երբեք 'sometime'. The same restrictions of usage
apply as to ոք, e.g. ոչ երբրք 'never'.

Generally speaking, new lexical items derived from old may be split into
two categories: derivatives from verbs and derivatives from nouns. More
precisely, words are derived from noun or verb stems. Typically the noun
stem is the same as the nominative-accusative form; the verb stem is either
the root aorist stem or the -ց aorist stem. In both noun and verb
derivation, the stem vowels may be subject to vocalic alternation.

22.1. Derivatives from Verbs

The most common derivatives from verbal stems
are listed below.

Causative Verbs: These are usually derived from intransitive verbs,
though some transitive verbs are also subject to causative derivation, e.g.
բնակեմ 'I dwell' yields բնակեցու'անեմ 'I make to dwell, I establish'.
Causatives are built from the aorist stem by addition of the suffix
-ոյց- / -ուց-. The form -ուց- occurs word-internally, -ոյց-
appearing otherwise. The -ե- found in -եայ aorists drops before the
causative suffix is added. Examples are listed below.

Present

Aorist

Causative Base

բնակեմ 'I dwell'

բնակեցի

բնակեցոյց-

մոլորիմ 'I err'

մոլորեցայ

մոլորեցոյց-

կամ 'I stand'

կացի

կացոյց-

ուսանիմ 'I study'

ուսայ

ուսոյց-

դառնամ 'I turn'

դարձայ

դարձոյց-

փախչիմ 'I flee'

փախեայ

փախոյց-

յառնեմ 'I rise'

յարեայ

յարոյց-

The present stem of causative verbs has the extension -ան-. The aorist
stem is the same as the base. Thus there are the following examples.

-ող, -աւղ (ա-decl.) E.g. նմանող 'resembling' from նմանիմ 'I resemble'; արբեցող 'drunkard' from արբենամ 'I get drunk'; ծնաւղ 'parent' from ծնանիմ 'I give birth'. This particular form of agent noun is often referred to as a present participle, on the same level in the verbal system as forms in -եալ. In this classification, there is a threefold distinction with a verb such as շինեմ 'build': շինող 'building', շինաւղ 'builder', շինեալ 'built, having built'. In Modern Armenian these forms have indeed come to function as present participles. In Classical Armenian, however, forms in -ող, -աւղ seem to be too infrequent to fill the role of a true participle, occurring less than one-tenth as often as forms in -եալ.

Inchoative Verbs: The suffix -անամ is typically appended to
adjectives to derive inchoative verbs. These fall into category (D) in the
classification of verbs. Examples are օջանամ 'I recover' from ողջ
'healthy'; չորանամ 'I become dry' from չոր 'dry'. In certain
instances such verbs are derived from nouns: քահանայանամ 'I become a
priest' from կահանայ 'priest'; վերանամ 'I am extolled', cf. ի վեր
'upwards'.

Nouns of State or Quality: The suffix -ութիւն may also be used to
derive nouns denoting quiality. Examples are բազմութիւն 'multitude' from
բազում 'many'; ճշմարտութիւն 'truth' from ճշմարիտ 'true';
քահանայութիւն 'priesthood' from քահանայ 'priest'.

Collective Nouns: Collective nouns may be derived by means of the
suffixes -իկ (սերունդ-decl.), -տի (տեղի-decl.), -եան. Examples
are մարդիկ 'men, people' from մարդ 'man'; մանկտի 'children' from
մանուկ 'child'; խոզեան 'pigs' from խոզ 'pig'. Such nouns are declined
in the singular only.

-ացի (ո-decl.) This suffix forms adjectives denoting origin or possession. They refer only to people and are often used as substantives. Examples are Կողբացի 'coming from Kołb' from Կողբ (place name); Իսրայելացի 'Israelite' from Իսրայէլ 'Israel'; քաղաքացի 'citizen' from քաղաք 'city'; դրացի 'neighbor' from դուռն, Pl. դուրք 'doors'.

-աւոր (ա-decl.) This suffix typically connotes 'possessing' or 'related to'. Derivatives stemming from this suffix are often used as substantives. Examples are թագաւոր 'king, the one wearing the crown' from թագ 'crown'; զաւրաւոր 'mighty' from զաւր 'strength'; մեղաւոր 'sinner' from մեղ 'sin'; դատաւոր 'judge' from դատ 'judgement'; մարմնաւոր 'bodily' from մարմին 'body'.

-եան (ա-decl.) In addition to rather general relational derivatives such as արեւելեան 'eastern' from արեւելք (Pl.) 'East', this suffix is often used to form patronymics. Examples are պղատոնեան 'platonic' from Պղատոն 'Plato'; Արամեան 'son/progeny of Aram'; Մամկիոնեան 'son/progeny of Mamikon'.

22.3. Iteration

Iteration is a process which may be used to derive new words from old. It
applies equally to verbs, nouns, and adjectives. For example one finds the
verbs հոտ-ոտ-իմ 'I smell' from հոտ 'scent' and կազ-կազ-եմ 'I
run back and forth'. There are substantives խոր-խոր-ատ 'pit' from
խոր 'deep', լեռն-լեռն-այն 'hill country' from լեառն 'hill',
հեղ-եղ 'current' from հեղանիմ 'I flow'. There are adjectives
մեծ-ա-մեծ 'very big', ջերմ-ա-ջերմ 'very warm', արագ-արագ
'very quick'. In most instances the reduplication serves as
intensification, as many of the above examples illustrate. The same
effect may be achieved merely by doubling a word in context, without
deriving a new combined word. For example one finds լուռ լուռ 'totally
quiet' and ծանր ծանր 'very tough'.

In contrast to the notion of intensification, although in some sense allied
to it, is the use of iteration in a distributive function. Examples are
գունդ-ա-գունդ 'in swarms' (also գունդ գունդ); գոյն-ա-գոյն
'multicolored'; ամի ամի 'throughout the year'; աւուր աւուր 'day by
day' (also աւր աւուր).

At times the doubling occurs with մ- preceding the second member, as in
աղխ-ա-մաղխ 'goods' from աղխ 'equipment', and in սուտ մուտ
'completely wrong' from *սուտ սուտ.

23. Case Syntax

The most common uses of the nominal cases are outlined below. For the use
of cases with simple or compound prepositions, see Section 5 of
Lesson 1.

23.1. The Nominative Case

The nominative case is the case of the grammatical subject, e.g.
կոյրք տեսանեն 'the blind regain their sight', աստեղք անկցինյերկնից 'stars will fall from heaven'. When the verb is a copula, the
nominative is also the case of the predicate: եին արդարք երկոքին
'they were both just'. The nominative, with or without ով, may be used
in forms of address: պատանի դու, արի 'get up, young man!' The
nominative is also used when quoting a person's name, even if the noun
representing the person so named is in another case: առ կոմսի ումեմնԼիկիանէս անուն կոչեցելոյ 'with an earl, called Likianos by name'.
Here կոմսի is in the locative case, modified by կոչեցելոյ, but the
name quoted, Լիկիանէս, remains in the nominative form.

The nominativus pendens is a usage whereby a word, which in its own
clause should grammatically be in another case, is placed at the head of
the statement in the nominative, and then taken up again by a pronoun in
the correct oblique case. For example, ծառայոր ընդ ունկն ոչլսէ, ընդ մկանունս տան լսել նմա 'the servant, who does not
listen with the ear, they make him listen with the back.' Here ծառայ is
in the nominative, marked in the main clause by the pronoun նմա.

23.2. The Accusative Case

The accusative case is the case of the direct object, e.g. որ ոչբերէ պտուղ 'which does not bear fruit'. Rarely a verb may take an
internal object: երկեան երկիւղ մեծ 'they had a great fear', lit.
'they feared a great fear.' Some verbs take a double accusative, such as
հարցանեմ 'I ask': հարցից ինչ զքեզ 'I ask you (something)'.
The accusative may be predicate: Ստոյիկեանքն... զամենայն ինչմարմին կարծեցին 'the Stoics held everything (to be) body.' The
accusative may denote an extent of space or time. From this use come such
adverbs as այնաւր '(during) this day', hence 'today'. An accusativeofrespect is found in the use of զայն աւրինակ 'by this means,
thus', and in the use of անուն in the accusative to mean 'by name, in
respect of name': առ կոմսի ումեմն Լիկիանէս անուն կոչեցելոյ
'with an earl, called Likianos by name'. The accusative form of adjectives
may be used adverbially: բարւոք մարգարէացաւ 'they prophesied well'.

The accusative is often marked with the preposition զ-. This is
generally used with demonstrative pronouns, relatives, personal pronouns,
proper names, and nouns with a demonstrative suffix. Examples are զնա
'this', զոր 'which', զիս 'me', զհայրն 'the father', զԱբրահամ
'Abraham'. The marker զ- is not an inherent feature of the accusative
case. It is often employed simply to distinguish the accusative form from
the nominative or locative forms, e.g. յորժամ դուստր զմայրանտրգիցէ, եւ նու զկեսուր իւր, եւ կին զայր, եւ ծառայզտէր, եւ եղբայր զեղբայր 'as the daughter reviled her mother, and
the daughter-in-law her mother-in-law, and the wife her husband, and the
servant his master, and the brother his brother.' The particles քան
'than', իբրեւ 'like, as', and որպէս 'like, as' are often followed by
զ- plus the accusative of the point of comparison, e.g. ոչՍողոմովն... զգեցաւ իբրեւ զմի ի նոցանէ 'Solomon... did not
dress as one of them.'

23.3. The Genitive Case

The genitive case is the possessive case. More generally, it is a
relational case, covering a wide range of nuanced meaning, usually
delimiting or specifying the sphere of validity of its referent. In
Classical Armenian, the genitive case is distinguished morphologically from
the dative only by personal pronouns and demonstratives. The genitive may
qualify a substantive, e.g. անուն նորա 'her name' or աւուր միոյճանապարհ 'a day's journey'. The genitive may be used as a predicate:
երկու պարտապանք եին ուրումն փոխատուի 'two debtors were of a certain
lender', i.e. 'there were two debtors of a certain lender', 'a certain
lender had two debtors.' A genitive modifying an infinitive used as a
substantive may indicate the logical subject of the action: դիւրինիցէ երկնից եւ երկրի անցանել, քան յաւրինացն միոյնշանախեցի անկանել 'it is easier for heaven and earth to perish than
for one stroke of the law to fall away.' The partitive genitive is more
often expressed by the preposition ի with the ablative, in the sense
'from among'.

Perhaps the most idiosyncratic use of the genitive in Classical Armenian is
with the participle in -եալ. When the subject of a clause is modified
by the past participle, this subject may be in either the nominative or the
genitive case, e.g. նորաառեալ զնա տարաւ 'he, having seized
(him), led him'; մատուցեալաշակերտացննորա ասեն ցնա 'his
disciples, having come, say to him...'. This usage is extended to
impersonal constructions involving the participle, where the genitive
denotes the logical subject: զպայն իսկիմաչաւք տեսեալ է
'I have seen the fairy with my own eyes'; առ եկեղեցեաւն, զորշինեալ էր առաջնոյն մեծինԳրիգորի 'at the church which the
first great Grigor had built.'

In clauses with the infinitive, the dative may often be considered to be
related to one word in particular, usually the infinitive itself. In these
situations the dative often supplies the subject of the action denoted by
the infinitive, e.g. եղեւ շաբաթու... անչանել նմա ընդարտորայսն 'it happened on the sabbath... that he went through the
fields'; պարտ է ինձ աւետարանել 'it is necessary for me to preach.'
Such constructions occur where Latin and Greek might employ an accusative
and infinitive.

23.5. The Locative Case

The locative case denotes static position in space or time, generally
equivalent to the English 'in', 'on', or 'at'. In Classical Armenian the
locative is only found with prepositions. By far the most common
preposition is ի, e.g. յայնմ կղզւոջ ոչ գտանէր ոչ ջուր...
եւ ոչ... 'on this island was found neither water nor...'. It is also
used with առ 'beside', e.g. նստէր առ դուրս 'he sat by the door';
with ընդ 'with', e.g. խաւսել ընդ նոսա 'to speak with them';
seldom with զ-, e.g. զգետնի հարկանել 'to cast on the ground'; with
ըստ 'after', e.g. հատուցանես իւրաքանչիւր ըստ գործս իւր 'you
shall repay each according to his deeds.'

23.6. The Ablative Case

The ablative case denotes the source or origin, and separation
therefrom. The ablative is used without a preposition only in certain
fixed situations, generally in conjunction with a monosyllabic substantive in
the accusative, often marked by ի. Examples are զ'ամէ ի ժամ 'from
time to time'; ամ յամէ 'each year'; տանէ ի տուն 'from house to
house'; ազգէ յազգ 'from people to people'; մինչեւ ի նաւասարդէնաւասարդ 'from new year to new year', that is, 'till the new year'; իքաղաքէ ի քաղաք 'from city to city'. The ablative forms
of personal pronoun, such as ինձէն and քեզըն, may be used without
propositions, typically with the meaning 'self': ես ինձէն աս՛աւքտեսի 'I have seen it with my own eyes.'

23.7. The Instrumental Case

The instrumental case denotes the means or instrument of an action,
whether physical or other. It roughly takes the place of the English
preposition 'with'. Examples are ոչ ոք գայ առ հայր, եթեոչ իմեւ 'no one approaches the father, except though me'; ելեալ...
ի գերեզմանէ անտի ահիւ եւ խնդութեամբ բազմաւ 'having gone...
from the grave with awe and great joy'; լի խնկով 'filled with incense'.
The instrumental may be used predicatively: որեարն այն խաղաղութեամբեն ընդ մեզ 'these men are peaceful with us'; մեր կեանքս չենյուսահատութեամբ 'our life is not (fallen) into despair.' The instrumental
is used in the sense of accompaniment, usually in conjunction with
following հանդերձ 'with, together with': անդ նստէր աշակերտաւքնհանդերձ 'he sat there with his disciples'; Յիսուս աշակերտաւքնիւրովք գնաց 'Jesus withdrew with his disciples.'

24. Future Expression and the Subjunctive

Classical Armenian lacks a morphologically distinct future tense. Inasmuch
as the subjunctive expresses purpose, wish, demand, or prospect, its sense
is linked to the expression of future events. It is therefore common to
find the Greek future translated by the aorist subjunctive. Within native
treatments of Armenian grammar it has thus been common to find the aorist
subjunctive called the futuretense. Since there is also a present
subjunctive, some treatments refer to two future tenses. The subjunctive
is not, however, the only means of relating future time in Classical
Armenian. When particular emphasis or clarity is required, the present
tense may express future action, e.g. ոչ հաւատամ 'I will not believe'.
When there is an attendant sense of necessity, the verbal adjective in
-լոց is often employed in periphrastic constructions: դու ես որգալոցն ես 'Art thou He who is to come?'.

25. Adverbial Clauses

The term adverbialclauses is here used as a catch-all term for
several types of clauses which modify a statement as a whole. This is in
contrast to, say, relative clauses, which usually modify a substantive
within a given statement. Typically in such clauses the subjunctive and
indicative moods of the verb stand in free contrast. That is to say, the
indicative is generally used for actual action, otherwise the subjunctive.
Some of the more important types of clauses are listed below with general
comments on construction.

Final Clauses: The verb of final clauses is always subjunctive. The
beginning of such clauses is typically signalled by զի, less often by
թե, եթե, or որպէս զի. Examples are այլ այս ամենայնեղեւ, զի լցցի որ ասացաւն ի տեառնէ 'this all happened so
that what the Lord had said be fulfilled'; ...եթե գաւրավարին հաճոյլինիցի '... so that he be pleasing to the one enlisting'; որպէս զիտեսցեն զգործս ձեր բարիս 'so that they may know your good deeds'.
If the subject or object is the same as in the main clause, the final
clause is typically expressed by an infinitive: տարան զնա ի խաչհանել 'they led him out to crucify (him)'. A final clause with a subject
different from that of the main clause may be expressed with a dativeplusinfinitive construction: խնայեցի ես ի քեզ,
չմեղանճել քեզ յիս 'I look after you that you not sin against me.'

Consecutive Clauses: Also termed resultativeclauses, these are
introduced by որպէս զի, իբրեւ զի 'so that'; or simply զի 'that'
or զի եւ (when the preceding clause contains a word meaning 'so' or 'in
such a way'). Less frequently եթե or մինչեւ introduce these clauses.
Examples are չարաչարք յոյժ, որպէս զի չեր հնար անցանելումեք ընդ այն ճանապարհ 'exceedingly harsh, so that it was not
possible for any one to proceed by that path'; այնչափ եմքողորմելի իբրեւ զի առանց ձորձոյ մի աւր չկարեմքհամբերել 'we are so dejected that we cannot go one day without a coat';
Աստուած այնպէս պատուել զմարդն կամեցաւ, զի գանձնիչխանութիւննպարգեւեաց նմա 'God wanted to so honor man that He granted him free
will.' An extended example of the use of եթե is the following: քանզիոչ եթե անմիտ ինչ ոք եղեւ նա ձԱստուծոյ, եթեչգիտէր, եթե որ ինչ ըստ Աստուծոյ կամացն լինի, բարիէ 'since there was none created by God so ignorant that he knew not that
whatever happened by the will of God is good.'

Temporal Clauses: These have been treated separately in Lesson 4,
Section 20.

Causal Clauses: These are usually introduced by զի, քանզի, վասնզի, թե or եթե, որովհետեւ 'since, because'; մանաւանդ զի
'especially since'. If the causal clause treats a factual occurrence, the
verb is conjugated in the indicative; if the clause treats an assumed
occurrence or one which is denied or refuted, the verb may be either
indicative or subjunctive. Examples are զիա՞րդ լինիցի ինձ այդ,
քանզի զայր ոչ գիտեմ 'how will this be, since I do not know a
man'; ընդէ՞ր զխաւսս իմ ոչ գիտէք դուք, վասն զի ոչկարէք լսել զբանն իմ 'on what account do you not know my speech?
since you are not able to hear my word'; մանաւանդ զի գտանեմք
'especially since we find'. զի may be strengthened by the demonstrative
այս or its instrumental form այնու, e.g. այնու զի ըստ չարեացգործոչն վրէժս պահանջիցէ, յայտ է եթե... 'since he
imposes penalties according to the wicked deeds, so it is clear that...'.

Exceptional Clauses: Under this heading are grouped clauses often
beginning in English with 'unless, except that..., save that..., save
to...'. In some instances Classical Armenian uses a construction with
infinitive and preposition, or with a negative participle: ոչինչգործեալ... մատնեցայ 'but had I done something,... I was betrayed'.
Elsewhere clauses with finite verb forms are employed. բայց եթե
often serves as English 'unless', usually followed by the subjunctive:
ո՞վ է սկիզբն այնպիսի անպատեհից, բայց եթե իցէ ինչչար զաւրութիւն 'who is the origin of such inconsistencies, unless it
is an evil force.' փոխանակ զի, and sometimes քան, renders English
'rather than that': փոխանակ զի պարտ եր ձեզ լինել վարդապետս,
պիտոյ է ձեզ ուսանել 'rather than that you should become teacher, it
is proper that you learn.'

Conditional Clauses: The subordinate clause (protasis) is introduced by
the conjunction եթե, less often թե, and only rarely with զի. Use of
զի in particular gives the sense 'when, in the case that': զի առանցկամացն Աստուծոյ գործին իրք ինչ, լինին չար 'in the case
that things are done contrary to the will of God, they are bad.' The
conjunction need not be the first word of the clause. ոչ is always used
for negation. The main clause (apodosis) is signalled by ապա, եւ, or
ապա եւ when it follows the protasis. There are three basic
constructions:

Protasis: subjunctive; Apodosis: indicative, subjunctive (as future), or imperative. These are the components of conditions signifying assumption, possibility, uncertainty, or generalization. Examples are զայս ամենայն քեզ տաց, եթե երկիրպագանիցես ինձ 'all these things I will give you, if you bow before me'; եթե ի մեռելոց ոք երթիցէ առ նոսա, եւ ապաշխարեսցեն 'if one of the dead journey to them, they will repent'; եթե ոչ ոք ծնցի վերստին, ոչ կարէ տեսանել զարքայութիւն Աստուծոյ 'if one be not born from above, he is unable to behold the kingdom of God.'

Protasis: past indicative; Apodosis: past indicative. These describe unreal conditions. Unreal conditions concerning the present employ the imperfect indicative in both clauses: սա թե մարգարէ ոք էր, ապա գիտէր... 'if this one were prophet, he would know...'; եթե Աստուած էր հայր ձեր, սիրեիք արդեաւք զիս 'if God were your father, you would love me.' Unreal conditions concerning the past typically employ a periphrastic pluperfect in either the protasis or apodosis, with a suitable past tense in the complementary clause. Examples are ըտե աստ լեալ եիր, եղբայրն իմ չէր մեռեալ 'if you had been here, my brother would not have died'; իմ եթե չէր եկեալ, եւ խաւսեցեալ ընդ նոսա, մեղ ինչ ոչ գոյր նոցա 'if I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have possessed sin.'